Who sees themselves in the books they read? An analysis of diversity in CBCA shortlisted middle-grade literature
Kit Russell
In 2023, it is a well-known industry fact that the Australian publishing sector is dominated by majority voices. Multiple studies have found that the rate of diverse stories and publishing professionals does not equate to that found in the wider Australian population. This lack of diversity extends into children’s literature, but the majority of studies focus on picture books and neglect analysis of more complex titles for older readers. Evidence also suggests that children develop social understandings of race and visible difference, whether or not this is explicitly taught by adults. With this in mind, it is vital to provide a range of authentic perspectives in children’s books, but both trade publishers and the Children’s Book Council (CBCA) Book of the Year Awards have preserved the wider trend of prioritising majority voices.
The data in this report builds on previous research into Australian publishing and provides an analysis of multiple points of diversity. However, it does not include in-depth analysis of the selected titles and is limited to qualitative analysis of book sales.
On the language of this report
The use of the term ‘diverse’ in this report includes people who are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, LGBTQIA+, non-binary, and disabled, as well as people of colour and those from ethnic, cultural and religious minorities. All these groups include an enormous variety of experience and are grouped thusly only to determine if there is a dominant ‘Other’ voice in Australian publishing. However, it is important to note that other groups’ experiences of postcolonial marginalisation are not equivalent to the experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, this land’s original inhabitants and custodians. Therefore, the research in this report will assess their inclusion separately to the other groups within this broad definition.
The term ‘Other’ includes White people, but importantly may include those who do not wish to publicly identify themselves as being part of a minority group, as is their right.
The issue of diversity in publishing
The Australian publishing industry is well aware of its deficit of diversity, not only in the content of its books, but in their authors and the greater workforce. The First Nations and People of Colour Writers Count (FNPOC Writers Count) sought to ascertain the number of Australian authors in 2018 who were Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and people of colour. Of 1,531 books used in this study, less than 1% were by Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander authors, 7% were by People of Colour, and 90% were by ‘Other authors’.
In 2020, Kate Larsen noted that a growing demand for diverse authors had not been met with an increase in the number of diverse editors, publishers and sensitivity readers. Larsen also emphasised that the specific imbalance of authors and editors has led to damaging editorial processes and inadequate author support. Similarly, Bridget Caldwell-Bright, a Jingili and Mudburra editor, called for the industry to better support Indigenous writers. She suggested that publishers develop guidelines and strategies specific to their organisation, again with a focus on non-Indigenous editors working with Indigenous writers. Caldwell-Bright also emphasised the need for paid opportunities that specifically target people from diverse backgrounds. These paid opportunities provide industry experience and training, without the prerequisites that often act as a barrier for those wanting to pursue a career in publishing.
In 2022, Susannah Bowen and Dr Beth Driscoll published the results of their survey of diversity in the Australian publishing industry. In line with the concerns raised by Larsen and Caldwell-Bright, the data (Tables 1–3) did not reflect the diversity of Australia’s population.
Under-represented groups (shaded lighter in Tables 1–3) included people with non-British European, Asian, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ancestry, as well as Muslims and Hindus. People with a disability accounted for only 5.2% of respondents compared to 17.7% of the Australian population. These groups represent the voices that remain unheard in Australian literature and the authors who receive inadequate support.
Diversity in children’s literature
Before diversity in children’s books can be discussed, it must be noted that multiple studies have found that children demonstrate racial bias from a young age. A longitudinal study of children in the USA from 1991 to 2002 found that ‘children showed a … same-group [gender and race] preference’ from age three, but that this ‘drastically decreased for Black Children’ at ages five and six, when White children’s same-group preference increased. This indicates that children who are not in a dominant cultural majority become aware of their minority status very early. A 2001 study demonstrated that children actively engage with the social construction of identities around race. It showed that children ‘not only learn and use ideas about race and ethnicity but also embed in their everyday language and practice the understood identities of who is white, Black, Latino, and Asian’, despite adults often believing this is not the case. Naomi Priest et al. found that primary-aged children in Australia are aware of both race and racism but that ‘there was heightened awareness among students from visible minority backgrounds who had experienced racism themselves’. Again, evidence suggested that parents are reluctant to bring up the topic of race or racism to avoid drawing attention to differences of which they believe children are not aware. Given this approach, children’s racism, perhaps predictably, extends into secondary schools. Racism was experienced by 70% of secondary students and the majority of these experiences were in school. These findings indicate that young children’s racist beliefs and behaviour, if not addressed, are not simply erased by education and maturity. Yared et al. conducted a scoping review of racial matters in Australian schools, confirming that Australian children are ‘willing and capable of engaging in discussions surrounding racial issues’ and the responsibility therefore lies with adults to provide ‘adequate support for children to explore racial issues’.
Research into Australian children’s fiction demonstrates few examples of minority backgrounds and experiences. The majority of this research has focused on picture books and in-depth analysis has also produced data on the incidence of authentic, rather than tokenistic or stereotypical, diversity. Dr Helen Adam, a key voice in this research, found that only 18% of picture books used in kindergartens contained non-dominant cultural representation, which reduced to 2% when they assessed books for culturally authentic representation. These findings are echoed by multiple recent studies into Australian picture books, where authentic representations of diverse ability, sexuality, gender identity, family structure and ethnicity are overwhelmingly rare. There has been some research into young adult books that has produced similar results, but this has been led primarily by Emily Booth and Bhuva Narayan and requires further analysis. The deficit of research into middle-grade literature (the industry-standard target age of which is approximately 8 to 12) is even more prominent, with little international and no Australian research that looks specifically into diversity at this reading level.
The role of the CBCA book awards
The CBCA Book of the Year awards were established in 1946 in order to ‘promote books of high literary and artistic quality’. It is noted as one of the few Australian book awards that has a significant effect on book sales (Macleod 2011; Wyndham 2016) and is self-described as ‘the most influential and highly respected in Australia’.
In an interview conducted for this report, Angela Crocombe, book buyer and assistant manager of Readings Kids, provided insight into the role of the CBCA in Australian book sales. She noted that there is very little popular interest in the awards unless they are featured in the mainstream press. However, she explained that even without media attention ‘when the announcements are made [she will make] a big order for … the notables, then for the shortlist, and then again for the winner’ although this is chiefly for purchases made by schools and libraries. Crocombe is also a CBCA committee member and noted that the organisation focuses on books that can be used in an educational setting: ‘The mission of the CBCA isn’t specifically about schools … but I do feel that it has become a very educational sector award’. Despite this, she emphasised the potential significance of awards for authors and publishers who are unable to fund large marketing campaigns.
Although CBCA notable, shortlisted and winning books do not generate significant public attention, it is still noteworthy that the increase in sales is through schools and libraries. The CBCA has a direct effect on the titles available to children and the representation and voices in books they are encouraged to read.
CBCA book submission and judging
The criteria for submitting a book to the CBCA awards are reasonably broad but include expenses to creators or publishers. Submission requires payment of the AUD $99.00–199.00 entry fee and provision of five printed copies of the book. The entry fee and provision of books require the author or publisher to commit financially to the award with no guarantee of monetary gain from sales or the award. Although this means that CBCA, as a not-for-profit, does not lose money in the administration of the awards, it also means that the voices of small publishers and low-profile authors may automatically be silenced.
Notably, the criteria for judge selection also require financial privilege. Each judge must be a financial member of the CBCA, receive no remuneration and must commit a considerable amount of time, including reading and reporting on books, and attending meetings and awards announcements. Additionally, judges are required to be ‘literary/visual literacy experts in children’s or young adult literature’, which implies a prerequisite of higher education or many years of experience. This means judges must do a significant amount of unpaid, skilled work for these awards as well as pay membership fees to be considered for the work at all. Inherently, this favours people of privilege who are likely to be highly educated and able to commit to work without compensation.
Within the criteria for judging, there is very little of diversity. All categories require that source materials be accurate and culturally appropriate but only the Eve Pownall Award includes a question of whether ‘the book fully engages the readers who can identify with the characters’. There is mention of ‘mature topics’ in two categories but the meaning of this is seemingly left to each judge’s discretion. Further mention of diversity, still undefined, is limited to the configuration of the judging panel. Additionally, a CBCA website search for diversity or equity, both listed as CBCA core values, return one result for ‘diversity’ that directs the searcher to a separate organisation.
It is remarkable that there is such little policy focus on increasing the number of books with diverse creators and characters. Given that over 80% of current CBCA judges have a background in teaching and librarianship and the titles are primarily bought by schools and libraries, it could be expected that educational standards would be considered when developing CBCA policy. The Australian Curriculum, the Australian Publishers Association and the Australian Public Library Alliance all recognise the importance of diversity in content for children. Neither the CBCA nor trade publishers are obliged to meet educational standards, but, given their typical backgrounds, the CBCA judges and committee could reasonably be expected to take educational recommendations on diversity into account.
Identifiable diversity in CBCA’s Book of the Year for Younger Readers
Given the lack of research into middle-grade fiction, this report will analyse the rate of identifiable diversity in CBCA shortlisted ‘Younger Readers’ Book of the Year (henceforth referred to as Younger Readers) books from 2018 to 2023. This award is aimed at children aged 7 to 12 years and essentially focuses on middle-grade books. The aim of assessing ‘identifiable diversity’ was based in children and adults being able to determine if a book represents a minority group with which they identify. This means that the analysis produces two separate sets of data: the proportion of diverse creators, and that of books consumers can identify as reflecting a perspective outside Australia’s dominant majority voice.
Younger Readers Creators
In the context of this report, the identifiable diversity of creators – authors and illustrators – was determined from identity markers on public profiles such as creator websites, public social media accounts, and publisher websites. Markers included named identities – e.g. gender, cultural background, Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people, religion, sexuality, neurodivergence and disability or health issues – and interpretable identity markers for gender, such as the use of pronouns or identities like ‘father’.
From 2018 to 2023, there were 36 Younger Readers books and 47 associated creators. Tables 4 and 5 (below) outline the identifiable diversity of these creators.
This data shows a similar domination of female voices to that found by Bowen and Driscoll (2022), except for the lack of non-binary people in this group. Additionally, none of the creators were found to identify as LGBTQIA+.
The rate of First Nations creators is higher than the 3% of children’s authors found in the FNPOC Writers Count (Kon-yu & Booth 2023). However, this increase is not reflected in people of colour, who accounted for 11% of children’s author in the FNPOC Writers Count. It is also important to note that there were no Torres Strait Islander creators identified.
Additionally, one creator identified their religion, one their neurodivergence and one their chronic illness, which each accounted for 2.13% of creators. No creator was found to identify themself as part of a majority group, except in the case of gender. In total, 39 (82.98%) do not publicly identify as being part of a minority group.
Book covers
Diversity in book covers was assessed through visual identity markers, accessed via publisher and bookseller websites. This assessment included markers such as skin colour, visible religious markers (such as a hijab, kippah, or dastār) and visible disability aids (such as a wheelchair, cochlear implants or diabetes patches).
It must be noted that the above table includes all identity markers that could be found on covers. Two covers included characters that are assumably people of colour, one of which included a character wearing a headscarf, likely a hijab. Notably, 11 of the books did not include any identifiable markers, often choosing to use silhouettes rather than defined images of characters. In total, 94.44% of Younger Readers books fail to feature any visual diversity of ethnicity or religion and children with these identities are less likely to see characters who look like them than they are animals or silhouettes. Additionally, there were no identifiable disability markers, which means that children with a disability have no visual representation in these titles.
Blurbs
Identity markers in blurbs were assessed with an essentially equivalent method to those for creator identities but included some terms that are more creative or metaphorical than technical, like ‘black dog’ as a metaphor for depression. The blurbs were also used to estimate the number of significant characters.
Although there is a significant disparity in the gender of creators, the percentage of significant male characters is a little over double that of male creators. However, like the creator identities, there are no identifiable non-binary characters. The gender of six characters is undefined, but it cannot be assumed that they are non-binary. No characters are distinguished as LGBTQIA+.
Of 53 significant characters, five (9.43%) had a minority cultural or ethnic background, including one identified Aboriginal character and no identified Torres Strait Islander characters. However, it must be noted that one of the books that lacked explicit identification was published by an Aboriginal owned and led publishing house, written/illustrated by two Aboriginal creators and makes note of the Aboriginal People’s Country on which the story takes place. The purpose of this analysis is not to dictate how diverse creators identify themselves or their characters, but rather looks at the wider trend: if this character was listed as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person, it would not affect the finding that they are under-represented compared to the dominant majority voice.
Of the five characters with physical health issues, two were children with cancer, one of whom had an associated disability. There were three physical injuries included in this count because it could not be determined if they were short-term or how much of the story focused on the child’s experience of limited physical ability. However, it must be noted that the experience of short-term injury cannot be equated to that of long-term disability, and these results mean that children with a disability are represented by just one of these books.
In total, only 41.67% of blurbs included identifiable diversity, as some books included multiple identity markers, which suggests that the majority of books do not include perspectives outside of those most dominant in Australian literature.
Conclusion
This report’s analysis of CBCA shortlisted Younger Readers titles demonstrably shows that middle-grade fiction is yet another category of Australian literature where diverse voices remain under-represented. Decades of research indicate that children are aware of race and visible minority backgrounds and can exhibit racist behaviour. If diversity is not discussed with children, their understanding of its social relevance is limited to patterns they can and do observe, some of which appear in the books they read that have been shown to favour majority perspectives. Despite this, adults who control access to children’s books have not provided a range of stories to ensure children can find representation of their own identities. They have also failed to provide representation on other demographics of people to offer an authentic example of those they may consider to be different to themselves.
More than 80% of the Younger Readers book creators do not publicly identify with any minority group. Additionally, over 90% of the covers and 58% of the blurbs for these books lack any identifiable diversity. The CBCA’s influence on books provided to children imbues the organisation with the responsibility to improve their levels of diversity. Given the award is so influential in the educational sector, educational guidelines on diversity are worth including in the award’s policy.
Other approaches could also be considered, which might seem radical to an industry dominated by privileged majority identities. The CBCA could partner with a major publishing house, to provide paid appointments of judges who identify as part of one of the under-represented diverse groups in the industry, as per the recommendation of Caldwell-Bright. CBCA Awards Foundation already has major publishers as benefactors, so this approach can be realistically pursued and would avoid putting additional financial strain on the not-for-profit organisation. Additionally, the CBCA could use data from previous notable, shortlisted and winning books to create an awards year specifically for creators from diverse backgrounds. This approach would unfortunately exclude creators who do not wish to publicly identify with a minority group; however, it would provide more opportunity for diverse children to see themselves in the books they read.
Consistent evidence has shown that diversity in the publishing sector is scarce: in stories, in creators and in the workforce that publishes and champions literature. This requires explicit action in all facets of the industry, including literature awards, in order to create meaningful change and advocate for voices that, as of 2023, remain under-represented.
About the author
Kit is a freelance editor and student of the Master of Writing and Publishing at RMIT. A scribbler more than an author, she loves to help bring stories to life and dreams of helping to improve the landscape of Australian publishing. She lives and works in Naarm, on the unceded lands of the Wurundjeri Woi-wurrung and Bunurong Boon Wurrung Peoples.